Researcher
Cedric H. de Coning
Contactinfo and files
Summary
Cedric de Coning is a Research Professor in the Research group on peace, conflict and development at NUPI.
He co-directs the NUPI Center on United Nations and Global Governance, and the Climate, Peace and Security Risk project. He coordinates the Effectiveness of Peace Operations Network (EPON) and contributes to the Training for Peace programme, the UN Peace Operations project (UNPO) and several others. He is also a senior advisor for ACCORD. He tweets at @CedricdeConing.
Cedric has 30 years of experience in research, policy advise, training and education in the areas of conflict resolution, peacekeeping, peacebuilding and peace and conflict studies. Cedric has a Ph.D. in Applied Ethics from the Department of Philosophy of the University of Stellenbosch, and a M.A. (cum laude) in Conflict Management and Peace Studies from the University of KwaZulu-Natal.
Expertise
Education
2012 PhD, Applied Ethics, Department of Philosophy, University of Stellenbosch
2005 M.A., Conflict Management and Peace Studies, University of KwaZula-Natal
Work Experience
2020- Research Professor, NUPI
2012-2020 Senior Researcher, NUPI
2006-2012 Researcher, NUPI
2002- Senior Advisor (Consultant), ACCORD
2002 Training Officer, UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO)
2001-2002 Political Affairs Officer, Office of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General (SRSG), UN Transitional Administration in East Timor (UNTAET)
2001 Civil Affairs Officer, Office of District Affairs, UN Transitional Administration in East Timor (UNTAET)
2000 Assistant Director: Programmes, ACCORD
1999-2000 Civil Affairs Officer, Bobonaro District UN Transitional Administration in East Timor (UNTAET)
1997-1999 Programme Manager: Peacekeeping, ACCORD
1988-1997 Assistant Director, Department of Foreign Affairs, Pretoria, South Africa
Aktivitet
Filter
Clear all filtersSustaining Peace: Can a new approach change the UN?
When António Guterres started as UN Secretary General, he emphasised that conflict prevention had to be a top priority of the United Nations. This is why the United Nations are currently working on specifying the new ‘sustaining peace’ approach, passed by concurrent resolutions of the UN General Assembly and the Security Council in 2016. What are the challenges with their implementation? How does the current geopolitical situation impact the concept? And does it have the potential to make the UN fit for the 21 century?
Adaptive peacebuilding
International peacebuilding is experiencing a pragmatic turn. The era of liberal idealism is waning, and in its place new approaches to peacebuilding are emerging. This article identifies one such emerging approach, gives it a name—adaptive peacebuilding—and explores what it may be able to offer peacebuilding once it is more fully developed. It builds on the knowledge generated in the fields of complexity, resilience and local ownership, and may help inform the implementation of the emerging UN concept of sustaining peace. It is an alternative to the determined-design neo-liberal approach that has dominated peacebuilding over the past three decades. It represents an approach where peacebuilders, working closely together with the communities and people affected by conflict, actively engage in structured processes to sustain peace by using an inductive methodology of iterative learning and adaptation. The adaptive peacebuilding approach embraces uncertainty, focuses on processes rather than end-states, and invests in the resilience of local and national institutions to promote change.
Implications of stabilisation mandates for the use of force in UN peace operations
When United Nations (UN) Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon announced that he will commission a review of UN peace operations during the June 2014 UN Security Council debate on ‘New trends in UN peacekeeping operations’, the main reasons he gave for why such a review was needed, was that UN peacekeeping is now routinely deployed in the midst of ongoing conflicts and, as a result has had to become more robust.[1] This trend has been exemplified by three recent UN peacekeeping mandates, namely the addition of the Forced Intervention Brigade (FIB) to the UN Organisation Stabilisation Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO), the UN Multidimensional Integrated Stabilisation Mission in Mali (MINUSMA), and the UN Multidimensional Integrated Stabilisation Mission in the Central African Republic (MINUSCA). These three missions have been deployed amidst ongoing conflict and they have robust mandates that allow them to use force in order to achieve the missions’ mandate. What sets them apart from other UN peacekeeping missions, however, is that they have all been specifically designated as ‘stabilisation’ missions. Only one other UN peacekeeping mission has had ‘stabilisation’ in its name before, and that is the UN Stabilisation Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH). This use of the word ‘stabilisation’ in the mandates and names of these UN peacekeeping mandates seems to signal a clear departure from previous practice. What does ‘stabilisation’ mean in a UN peacekeeping context, i.e. what is the difference between a UN mission that has ‘stabilisation’ in its name and one that does not? And what are the implications for UN peacekeeping doctrine, and specifically its practices around the use of force, of this new trend towards UN stabilisation missions? In this chapter Cedric de Coning considers what stabilisation could mean in the UN peacekeeping context by analysing the mandates of MONUSCO, MINUSMA and MINUSCA, so as to identify what is different in these stabilisation mandates from other UN peacekeeping mandates. He then considers the implications of stabilisation mandates for UN peacekeeping doctrine, including especially the principles and practices around the use of force in UN peacekeeping.
Directed Improvisation: How China Escaped the Poverty Trap
How do organisations effectively transform themselves to cope with changing environments? Yuen Yuen Ang presents a new way to think about building adaptive capacity, with lessons from China.
The Challenge of Sustaining Peace: Enhancing and Moving Beyond the United Nations' Peacebuilding Architecture
Une volonté partagée de façonner un nouvel ordre mondial
In the West, the rise of nationalist populism reached a tipping point in 2016 when it generated both the UK vote for Brexit and the election of President Trump in the US. In contrast, over the same period, the BRICS have invested in strengthening inter-BRICS cooperation and the group’s commitment to the United Nations, global governance and economic globalisation. Their primary focus has been on financial, trade and economic cooperation. However, their ability to develop a shared analysis of the political and security dimensions of the global order seems to have come to a turning point in 2017, when they opted to focus their annual Summit on developing strategies to defend global governance, economic globalisation, free trade, and joint action on climate. How did we get to the point where it seems to be up to the BRICS to rescue globalisation ?
The Role of the Civilian Component in African Union Peace Operations
The role of civilians in African Union (AU) peace support operations (PSOs) is still not fully understood. As a result, civilian capacity development has not been well resourced in comparison with the military and police dimensions of the African Standby Force (ASF) and has only modestly developed since 2006. As at the end of 2016 the AU has deployed approximately 400 civilians across its PSOs in Burundi, the Central African Republic (CAR), Mali, Somalia and Sudan. The average size of the actual civilian component in each mission totalled approximately fifty people. The civilian components most commonly found in AU PSOs are Political Affairs, Human Rights and Protection, Public Information, Humanitarian Liaison, Safety and Security, Civil Affairs, Gender and Mission Support. Despite AU policies and PSO doctrine, the value of a multidimensional approach to PSOs, and the role that civilians perform in this larger context, is not widely recognised in the AU Commission, AU PSOs or among the AU’s key PSO partners. The AU has struggled to articulate clearly why it needs a multidimensional approach, what the function and contribution of the civilian components are, and how the civilians staff contribute to achieving the mandate of a particular mission. This will have to change if the AU is serious about undertaking comprehensive stabilisation operations.
Support to UN Peace Operations: Ensuring More Effective UN Peace Operations (UNPO)
The aim of the project is to strengthen the ability of UN peacekeeping and other peace operations to respond to global security challenges, adapt to a changing global order, and continue contributing ...
The UN we need?
Is UN Peace Operations adapting fast enough to remain relevant in today’s rapidly changing global landscape?
New book: Rising Powers may fundamentally change peacebuilding
What exactly is new and innovative about the peacebuilding approach of the rising powers from the Global South?